
Bird flu ban: Brazil suspension takes chicken and polony off South African tables — prices set to rise
Most South African households, particularly those with low incomes, rely heavily on chicken, as it is cheaper than other meat options like beef, lamb, and pork, making it one of the most accessible protein sources.
Brazil plays a significant role in ensuring that South Africans have enough chicken, as the country accounts for more than 84% of South Africa's poultry imports.
However, Brazil has recently experienced an outbreak of avian influenza, also known as the bird flu, which led to the South African government imposing a ban on imports from the country.
Chicken shortage
Department of Agriculture Deputy Director General of Agricultural Production, Biosecurity, and Natural Resources, Dipepeneneng Serage told The Citizen that the Department will monitor outbreak management and general disease management and control in Brazil, assessing reports from Brazil until the outbreak is closed before lifting the suspension.
Imameleng Mothebe, CEO of the Association of Meat Importers and Exporters (AMIE), said local producers cannot, and will not be able to meet the gap in supply of poultry offal (feet, gizzards, and skins) and mechanically deboned meat (MDM), driving up prices and threatening the affordability and accessibility of basic protein for millions.
'Chicken offal and MDM are not luxuries. They are foundational to school feeding programmes and the production of processed meats, which are the most affordable proteins for low-income households. Ultimately, Brazilian MDM is the source of more than 400 million poultry-based meals per month for South Africa.'
She added that, even though SA poultry producers have committed to increasing their production by four million birds per month, local producers alone cannot fill the gap created by the ban. And another challenge is that SA does not produce MDM at a commercial scale.
ALSO READ: Here are the economic and social impacts of bird flu
How much have chicken prices increased
Mothebe added that if there is no regionalisation agreement put in place with Brazil, which will allow for the import of products from areas not affected by the outbreak, there will be many devastating impacts.
The blanket ban on Brazilian imports can lead to price increases, food shortages, and job losses for local manufacturers of processed meats who employ more than 125 000 workers.
'With the current shortage of MDM, processed meat producers are facing cost surges as inventory levels are thinning, and shelf prices are starting to reflect this reality,' she said.
MDM prices have increased from R13 to R31/kg, while offal, such as gizzards and skins, have seen double-digit increases.
Higher costs
She stresses that these price increases will be met by rising input costs, especially with the recently announced fuel levy hike in the national budget, which adds inflationary pressure across the value chain.
'We support government continuing engagements with Brazil towards regionalisation, a concept that demarcates affected areas whilst the rest of the country remains open. Regionalisation is widely accepted and supported by the World Organisation of Animal Health (WOAH), especially considering the ongoing global diseases phenomenon.'
No polony for lunchboxes
Arnold Prinsloo, CEO of meat producer Eskort said they use the MDM from Brazil to make polony, viennas, russians and braaiwors. The blanket ban on Brazil will put production lines to a standstill before the end of June.
'This will deprive South Africa's most vulnerable citizens of more than 400 million low-cost meals per month.
'Vulnerable families and thousands of school feeding schemes rely heavily on polony, and there is a real danger of widespread hunger and malnutrition if Eskort and its competitors cannot sustain supplies.'
Prinsloo is calling on the Department of Agriculture to lift the blanket ban on Brazil and allow imports from parts of the country that have not experienced the outbreak.
'Brazil has indicated that it has submitted the necessary documentation and information to the department, but formal recognition and implementation remain outstanding,' he said.
ALSO READ: Here's why chicken prices might increase soon
Job losses looming
Prinsloo added that the four- to six-week gap in supply due to the ban will also mean that many processors will face standing idle for more than 60 days, risking heavy job losses and instability in the lower LSM consumer segment.
'This is not only a supply chain crisis, but also a pending socio-economic and political disaster.'
Can local poultry producers cover the gap?
The South African Poultry Association (Sapa) seems to believe that local producers can make up for the gap created by the ban.
'We are currently producing about 21.5 million chickens per week, and the industry has the capacity to increase this by about another million birds per week.
'The impact of a ban on Brazilian chicken imports will not be felt immediately. Chicken imports from Brazil can take about six weeks to reach South Africa, and products dispatched before the ban is implemented will not be affected,' said Izaak Breitenbach, CEO of Sapa's Broiler Organisation.
He added that winter months are a period of lower demand for chicken. Therefore, the additional supply of chicken should be sufficient to prevent shortages or price increases.
However, Prinsloo disputed claims that local producers can make up for the chicken shortfall. 'It may be true when it comes to fresh or frozen chicken, but the local market doesn't produce mechanically deboned meat in any significant quantity,' he said.
'We rely on Brazil for 92% of our needs, which is why this is such a serious challenge.'
NOW READ: Godongwana cuts zero-rated food basket in Budget 3.0
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
South African Lens: Pakistan's Divorce Laws Leave Women in Financial Limbo
As it stands, Pakistan follows a model where property remains separate unless jointly titled—regardless of a woman's unpaid contributions to the household or her support for her husband's career. This issue has been spotlighted in Pakistan's courts. Image: Supplied In many societies, divorce is not just a personal rupture but a financial reckoning — especially for women. This is starkly true in Pakistan, where the legal system fails to recognise a woman's right to marital property, often leaving divorced wives with little more than the clothes on their backs. For South Africans watching global gender justice trends, Pakistan's legal landscape raises urgent questions about how tradition, law and social norms can entrench inequality in the private sphere. Despite Islam's emphasis on justice and the protection of the vulnerable, Pakistani women who exit a marriage often do so without any claim to assets acquired during the relationship. This is because Pakistan does not currently have legislation that guarantees women a share in property accumulated while married. As it stands, the country follows a model where property remains separate unless jointly titled, regardless of a woman's unpaid contributions to the household or her support for her husband's career. This issue has been spotlighted in Pakistan's courts. The Lahore High Court recently instructed the federal government to consult on a proposed amendment to the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance of 1961. The amendment, initially brought forward by Senator Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, introduces terms such as 'matrimonial asset' and seeks to give women fairer recognition of their contributions. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ The court's intervention may become a turning point, as public discourse grows around the injustice of women leaving long marriages with nothing, despite having raised children, run households and sacrificed careers. To understand the impact, it helps to look beyond Pakistan's borders. Countries such as Turkey, Malaysia and Morocco — Muslim-majority states like Pakistan—have adopted laws that balance Islamic principles with modern family realities. In Turkey, marital assets are presumed to be jointly owned unless otherwise agreed. Malaysia takes both financial and non-financial contributions into account when dividing property. Morocco's Family Code permits couples to decide beforehand how to share property, with the law recognising joint management during the marriage. These countries demonstrate that religious values and women's rights need not be in conflict. Legal frameworks can uphold the dignity and equality of both spouses, particularly when marriages dissolve. Currently, Pakistan's system mirrors what legal scholars call a pure separate property regime. Under this model, property belongs only to the person who earned or acquired it. There is no assumption that marriage creates an economic partnership, and courts generally require strict proof of ownership. This often disadvantages women who have worked in the home or made indirect contributions, as they lack titles or formal income records. South Africa, by contrast, provides multiple options when couples marry, including community of property, which assumes equal ownership of assets acquired during the marriage. This legal approach acknowledges that both spouses contribute to the financial foundation of the household, even if in different ways. South African courts, when dividing property, also take into account each partner's needs, contributions and the duration of the marriage. It is a system far more aligned with the complex social reality of marriage than Pakistan's outdated laws. The cost of inaction in Pakistan is high. Women who divorce often lose access to shelter and income. Even where they have invested years in managing the home or caring for children, the law offers no recourse. Many end up dependent on their families or feel pressured into remarriage for economic survival. This perpetuates gendered cycles of poverty and limits women's agency. Pakistan has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which requires states to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including property rights. CEDAW's guidance calls for equal access to marital assets. Other Muslim-majority countries have made strides toward compliance. Tunisia and Iran, for instance, have introduced property-sharing rules that acknowledge both partners' roles in a marriage. Pakistan, however, remains out of step. Legal reform is not only a technical matter. It is about recognising that women are equal partners in family life, deserving of financial security when that partnership ends. Amending the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance to define and protect matrimonial property would help courts provide more consistent, fair outcomes. It would also signal that Pakistan is serious about its commitments to gender equality, both to its citizens and the global community. For South Africans, watching this debate unfold is a chance to reflect on how far we have come and how far others still need to go. In a world where women's rights are constantly under pressure, the battle for fairness within the family is as important as any public policy reform. Pakistan stands at a fork in the road. One path leads to continued injustice and economic hardship for women. The other leads to fairness, dignity and the recognition of women's work — paid or unpaid—as valuable and deserving of protection. The choice, now, is in the hands of lawmakers.


Daily Maverick
8 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Who will steer the R55bn marriage of MultiChoice and Canal+?
There's a new power couple in African media. After nearly five years of courting, Canal+ has finally put a ring on MultiChoice to form a pan-African content colossus with global ambitions. French media titan Canal+ has secured the final go-ahead to acquire MultiChoice in a landmark R55-billion deal. After years of quiet manoeuvring and regulatory hurdles, the merger is now a question of who controls what. The Competition Tribunal's conditional approval, granted late last week, closes the chapter on a five-year 'creeping takeover' and opens a new era in African broadcasting. Now it's a balancing act weighing foreign capital with national sovereignty on a digital scale with local content. Enter the media monarchy In return for its princely sum, Canal+, owned by the French conglomerate Vivendi, gets access to MultiChoice's 14.5 million Anglophone and Lusophone subscribers, the DStv powerhouse, sports juggernaut SuperSport, and a foothold in streaming via Showmax. MultiChoice, facing rising costs and subscriber declines, finds itself rescued by a suitor with deep pockets and pan-African ambition. Combined, the merged entity will serve more than 24 million subscribers across 50 countries — instantly becoming the largest pay-TV and streaming provider on the continent. However, if Canal+ was hoping for free access, South African regulators had other plans. The deal's approval came wrapped in layers of red tape — not as a deterrent, but as a deliberate design feature. Transformation goals Central to the regulatory conditions is the creation of LicenceCo, an independent company that will hold MultiChoice South Africa's broadcast licence. It will be majority-owned and controlled by historically disadvantaged South Africans and employees. Crucially, Canal+ has no control and no board seats. This structural firewall protects South Africa's legal requirements around media ownership, ensures transformation goals are met and serves as a template for foreign investment in other sensitive sectors. Phuthuma Nathi, the B-BBEE shareholder darling, increases its economic interest in LicenceCo to 27%, with a new employee trust added. The licence, and the local airwaves it governs, stay South African. The R30bn lobola The Competition Tribunal didn't just demand structural separation; it also extracted a commitment package valued at more than R30-billion. This includes: A three-year moratorium on retrenchments linked to the merger; Significant investment in local content production, sports broadcasting, SMME procurement and Corporate Social Investment programmes; Ongoing free-to-air broadcast access for key sporting events, safeguarding the public's ability to view major matches without a subscription; and Local skills development through Canal+'s 'University Programme', to train historically disadvantaged individuals in broadcasting and production. In a media environment where Netflix and Amazon Prime are increasingly dominant, this local-first approach is designed to future-proof South African media. Showmax, SuperSport and scale Behind the regulatory muscle lies a clear commercial imperative. MultiChoice has struggled in recent years, shedding 2.8 million linear subscribers and burning cash to prop up Showmax 2.0, its streaming reboot built on Comcast tech and bolstered by NBC Universal's 30% equity stake. Canal+ brings financial stability and scale. It also inherits Irdeto, MultiChoice's profitable cybersecurity unit, and Showmax's potential to become Africa's answer to global streamers. Vivendi, Canal+'s parent company, views this merger as critical to its own transformation and part of a plan to split into three listed entities, with Canal+ as its global growth engine. Listing Canal+ on the JSE within nine months of deal completion is a further nod to local inclusion, visibility, and capital market confidence. The shiny ring can't cover controversial holes While South Africa celebrates a structurally sound deal with tangible local benefits, not all observers are convinced. Critics warn that Canal+'s track record and the Bolloré Group's 30.4% stake in it come with baggage. Vivendi's past includes one of the largest corporate losses in history and regulatory infractions that still cast a shadow. Vincent Bolloré, the billionaire behind the curtain, faces corruption charges in France and has been accused of turning Canal+'s French media outlets into right-wing political mouthpieces. With Canal+ now embedded in South Africa's broadcasting ecosystem, some fear creeping influence over editorial independence, particularly if there are future attempts to deepen ownership or control beyond the current firewall. Marriage isn't buying a horse Mergers are easy to announce but hard to manage. However, the competition bodies have played their hand cleverly — extracting commitments, safeguarding jobs and setting a precedent for how global capital must behave when it enters South Africa's strategic sectors. The long-term test lies ahead. Can Showmax truly compete with Netflix? Can SuperSport keep its sports crown as global streamers outbid for rights? Will LicenceCo be a transformative force or a regulatory box-ticker? Will Canal+ respect the firewall, or try to chip away at it over time? The merged entity is now king of the hill in African broadcasting, but it's a kingdom that won't run on size alone. Trust, execution and transformation will be the currencies of success. DM


The Citizen
8 hours ago
- The Citizen
Daily Lotto results: Sunday, 27 July 2025
Tonight's jackpot is R400 000! Here are your winning Daily Lotto results for 27 July 2025. Get the Daily Lotto results as soon as they are drawn on The Citizen. Daily Lotto results for 27 July 2025: 14, 17, 25, 28, 32. Here are the DrawResults & Payouts for (27/07/25): #DAILY LOTTO: 14, 17, 25, 28, 32 Congratulations to all the #winners! Players must be 18 years or older, play responsibly. ITHUBA is the proud operator of the National Lottery. — #PhandaPushaPlay (@sa_lottery) July 27, 2025 The winning Daily Lotto numbers will appear below after the draw. Usually within 10 minutes of the draw. You might need to refresh the page to see the updated results. How to play Daily Lotto in SA? If you are buying a ticket in-store: Pick up a betslip in any lottery store. Choose five numbers between 1 and 36, or select a Quick Pick. Entries cost R3 each. You can play a max of R150, but you are allowed to play multiple boards. Select how many consecutive draws you wish to enter, up to a maximum of 10. Leave blank for a single draw. Take your betslip to the teller to pay for your ticket. Write your details on the back of your ticket in case you need to claim a prize. If you do not sign your ticket and it is lost, anyone can use it to claim the prize. If you are playing online: Set up a lottery account here and make a deposit to pay for tickets. Choose five numbers from 1 to 36 or select 'Quick Pick' to generate a random set. Repeat this on as many boards as you want to play. Decide whether to enter a single draw or multiple draws. Confirm and pay for your entry The Daily Lotto draws take place shortly after 9:30pm every evening, and tickets can be bought until 8:30pm. Is there a winner every day? Yes. The jackpot prize money is guaranteed to be given away even if no one matches all five numbers. When this happens, the jackpot is split between everyone who matches two or more numbers. Visit and go to the How to Play Daily Lotto section to learn more.